Methods and systems for searching for and identifying data repository deficits

ABSTRACT

A computing system for searching for and identifying data repository deficits includes an interactive database of items, a data repository that stores a first type of information related to items, a search engine configured to identify items that do not have an amount of the first type of information that meets a first threshold, a candidate selection interface that provides functionality for the user to select an item from recommended candidate items needing the first type of information, a user interface via which the user can provide the first type of information for an item selected by the user, a game system configured to calculate for a game scores and rankings based at least in part on data stored in the data repository.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/614,844, filed Sep. 13, 2012, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/196,799, filed Aug. 2, 2011, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,290,811, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/864,521, filed Sep. 28, 2007, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,001,003, the contents of which are incorporated herein in their entirety.

BACKGROUND Description of the Related Art

Certain conventional online systems maintain various kinds of databases, including records for various item types. One drawback of conventional online systems is that typically many items or categories of items may have unpopulated record fields, depriving others of access to such information.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Example embodiments will now be described with reference to the drawings summarized below. These drawings and the associated description are provided to illustrate particular example embodiments and implementations, and not to limit the scope of the invention.

FIG. 1 illustrates a web site system that implements services described herein, and illustrates the flow of information between components of the system.

FIGS. 2, 2A1-2, 3, 3A1-2, 4, 4A1-3, 5, 5A1-3, 6, 6A1-2, 7, 7A1-2, 8, 8A1-3, 9, and 9A1-3 illustrate example user interfaces.

FIG. 10 illustrates an example process performed by the system illustrated in FIG. 1.

FIG. 11 illustrates another example process performed by the system illustrated in FIG. 1.

FIG. 12 (including FIGS. 12A1-6) illustrates another example user interface.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Various features and methods will now be described in the context of a system and a set of services used to identify database records having a paucity of certain types of data. By way of illustration, the database records may be associated with products or services, and the deficiency in data may be product or service reviews.

Certain example embodiments described herein search for and identify items in an interactive electronic catalogue that do not have an associated item review or are missing other desirable information. Such items are identified to certain users and such users are prompted or otherwise encouraged to submit the missing information. For example, users may participate in an information submission game, where users may be assigned points for submitting certain types of information for an item. Additional points are optionally assigned for a given submission based on the number of votes from other users indicating that the helpfulness and/or accuracy of the submitted information. Points are optionally subtracted based on the number of votes from other users indicating that the submission is not helpful and/or inaccurate. Optionally, a cap is provided on the number of points a given information submission can be awarded. Optionally, a floor is provided with respect how low a point score an information submission may receive.

Certain example embodiments track information submission scores for a plurality of users and using such information, assign rankings and/or titles (such as badges). Certain example embodiments provide user interfaces that display information on a first review online game, including player rankings, titles/badges, top player(s) in a given period of time, players having submitted the most or more helpful information.

By way of example, the information submission may be a review in the form of a textual review, a point review (which may be in the form of a number of stars), a grade review, an icon review (e.g., happy or sad face), an audio review (e.g., recorded live or submitted as an audio file, such as an MP3, ACC, OGG, WAV, AC3, WMA, or other file format), a video review (e.g., recorded live, or submitted as an MPEG, Flash, WMV, AVI, or other file format, and optionally including an audio component), and/or other form of review. The items/products may, for example, include physical products that are shipped to users, digital products that are downloaded or transmitted to users, and/or services provided to users. As will be recognized, the disclosed methods are also applicable to other types of items, such as authors, musical artists, users, businesses, brands, web sites, web pages, user communities, chat rooms, blogs, etc.

Throughout the description, the term “product” will be used to refer generally to both an actual product (e.g., an Acme Widget) and to its record or description in a computer data repository. A more specific meaning may be implied by context. The more general term “item” will be used in the same manner.

While the following description may refer to incentivizing or motivating users to submit first product reviews, the processes and systems discussed herein can be used to incentivize or motivate users to perform other actions, such as submitting reviews generally, submitting tags, providing votes as to the quality or helpfulness/unhelpfulness of reviews or other submissions, submitting pictures of products, submitting product catalogs, submitting product manuals, submitting guides, submitting articles, participating in an online discussion, updating product information, recommending accessories (e.g., products that can be used with a given item, such as ink for a printer, batteries for an electronic toy, memory cards for cameras, software for computers, service contracts for electronic products, phone service for a cellular phone, etc.), providing recommendations as to similar alternate products, submitting useful software programs or widgets, adding information or corrections to a wiki/collaborative website, participating in a forum, etc.

To facilitate an understanding of the specific embodiments described below, an overview will initially be provided of an example web site system. Throughout the description, reference will be made to various implementation-specific details of this system. These details are provided in order to fully illustrate specific embodiments, and not to limit the scope of the invention.

In this particular embodiment, the web site system (“web site”) comprises functionality for users to search, browse, and make purchases from an interactive electronic catalog of products, such as book titles, music titles, video/DVD titles, and electronics products over the Internet, or other network, and to provide reviews for items in the catalog. The web site may also provide functionality for renting products (such as software, DVDs or downloaded movies or music), for listing products for sale in an online marketplace, and/or for performing other types of product-related actions. The various products are optionally arranged within a hierarchical browse structure or “browse tree” in which a node represents a product category or subcategory.

Detailed information about a product can be obtained by accessing that product's detail page. As used herein, a “detail page” is a page that predominantly contains information about a particular product or other item. In a particular example embodiment, a product detail page may comprise a description, picture, and price of the product, customer reviews of the product (if any have been submitted) and a listing of helpful/unhelpful review votes, lists of related products, and information about the product's availability from one or more sellers. When an audio or video review is posted on a detail page, optionally playback controls (e.g., play, pause, rewind, fast forward, increase volume, decrease volume, etc.) are provided as well. When a video review is posted on an item page, optionally a still (e.g., the first frame) from the video review is statically displayed prior to the user activating a playback control. Optionally, a textual title submitted by a user in association with a video or audio review may be displayed as well. The product detail pages may also provide functionality for users to perform such actions as purchasing the product, creating a listing for selling the product, submitting a product review, voting on a product review, and/or adding the product to a personal shopping cart, wish list, or rental queue.

The product detail pages, and/or other pages of the web site, optionally also include elements for users to assign tags (e.g., a keyword or category label) to particular products. These tags may be used for various purposes, including obtaining product recommendations that are specific to user-definable product categories, interests, and contexts. In one embodiment, users can also obtain personalized recommendations without tagging any products; these recommendations may be based on the target user's purchase history, rental history, item viewing history, first reviews for products submitted by the user, other product reviews submitted by the user, and/or product ratings.

The recommendations provided by the web site are generated by a recommendation service or “engine” that, may for example, accept an input list of items (e.g., product IDs), and returns an output list of items that are deemed to be collectively similar or related to the items on the input list. The recommendation service may also optionally take into consideration information about the known or predicted affinity the user has for particular items on the input list. For example, if a user provided a review on an item (optionally even if there is no record on the system of a purchase of the item by the user), other similar products or products purchased by other users that purchased the reviewed product may be recommended to the user. Products that the user provided first reviews on may be weighted more heavily in determining an affinity and providing recommendations then products where the user provided a review but did not provide the first review.

Further, the content of the review provided by the user (e.g., the point rating or a text rating parsed by the system) may be used in determining what products to recommend to the user. For example, if the user rated one item on the input list highly, and gave an average rating or no rating to another item, the highly rated item may be given more weight. Examples of methods and data structures that may be used to implement the recommendations service are described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,912,505, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference.

It has been observed that users are more likely to purchase products that have associated reviews available. User written reviews often give other users a more credible evaluation of a product than the description provided by the product manufacturer or distributor. Thus, a significant increase in sales may occur upon the presence of even a single positive review. Further, the existence of at least one review may encourage others to submit reviews. Thus, in order to encourage users to submit reviews for products or other items where no reviews have yet been submitted and accepted, certain example embodiments identify which products have not yet been reviewed and/or have less than a certain number of reviews. The system may then encourage or incentivize users to submit reviews for such products. This is enables the system to better ensure that review coverage is provided for a larger number and distribution of products and product types.

By way of example, a game or contest may be provided wherein the submission of initial reviews (also referred to as first reviews) for a product or other item may result in the user being rewarded or otherwise recognized, thereby providing an incentive to participate and play. Optionally, a user is entered into the game automatically upon submission of a review by the user. Optionally, a user can opt in or out of the game via an account maintenance Web page or otherwise. If the user opts out of the game, the system does not display the user's first review game ranking or badges, and optionally, the user's first reviews are not considered in assigning rankings to other users play the game.

In an example review game, a user may be given a certain number of points for each review the user submits that is the first review for the corresponding product. The user may be enabled to compete against himself/herself, wherein if the user achieves certain point levels the user is assigned a certain designation (e.g., a title/badge) that indicates such achievement. For example, if the user reaches a first number of points (e.g., 40 points), the user is assigned a first title (e.g., bronze medal winner). If the user reaches a second number of points (e.g., 100 points), the user is assigned a second title (e.g., silver medal winner). If the user reaches a third number of points (e.g., 500 points), the user is assigned a third title (e.g., gold medal winner). If the user reaches a fourth number of points (e.g., 2000 points), the user is assigned a fourth title (e.g., platinum medal winner), and so on. Optionally, the user's points may be reset to zero or other number periodically (e.g., every three months), and the user would need to earn new points in order to achieve the title or badge. Other titles or badges may be assigned to a user based on the number of first reviews submitted by the user or based on other first review parameters.

In addition or instead, a user can compete with other users participating in the first review game. For example, a user can compete with other users based on the relative number of points, titles, badges, and/or other forms of recognition (e.g., having a review highlighted on a helpful review Web page or designated as a most helpful first review) they acquire. A list of first review submitters can be presented in order of their point rankings and/or titles. The rankings and/or titles can be displayed in association with a ranked list entry. For example, a listing entry can include some or all of the following:

-   -   current ranking;     -   previous ranking (e.g., during a specified period, such as the         previous week, month, and/or year);     -   a graphic indicating a trend or change in ranking (e.g.,         indicating whether the ranking has improved from a previous         period, gotten worse, or is unchanged);     -   a title/badge (e.g., best first reviewer, top 10 first reviewer,         top first reviewer within a specified period of time (e.g.,         today, this week, this month, last 90 days, this year, etc.));     -   a user name (which may be the user's actual name, or a pseudo         name/nickname);     -   the total current points for the user's first reviews (which may         be restricted to points received within a specified period of         time, such as the previous 90 days or 1 month);     -   the number of first reviews for products submitted by the user;     -   a helpfulness or usefulness score (e.g., a percentage of the         total helpful/not-helpful votes for the user's first product         reviews that indicate the reviews are helpful, and/or a tally of         the number of helpful votes submitted by others for the user's         first reviews within a specified time period, optionally with         points detracted for unhelpful votes);     -   number of first reviews submitted by the user.

Optionally, some or all of the foregoing information is updated in substantially real time. Optionally, the list can be sorted based on one or more of the entry information types (e.g., based on ranking, badges, helpfulness score, number of reviews, etc.).

The rankings, titles, badges, trend indicators, and/or other information will often motivate users to improve their ranking, title, badge, and/or ranking performance trend. Information is optionally provided to users indicating how they can improve their ranking, title, badge, and/or ranking performance trend. Optionally, the ranking and title assignment process and criteria are explicitly disclosed to users so as to provide transparency with respect to scoring, ranking, and the assignment of titles.

A user can be provided with notifications (e.g., via email, Short Message Service (SMS), instant messaging, a Web page, or otherwise) when a significant event has occurred with respect to their ranking, title, badge, or trend or that of other users. Optionally, the user can specify via an account setup Web page the type of notifications that are to be provided and how the notifications are to be provided. For example, the notifications can be triggered by one or more of the following events:

-   -   change in the user's ranking;     -   change in the user's title;     -   change in another specified user's ranking;     -   change in another specified user's title;     -   surpassing another specified user's ranking;     -   being surpassed by another specified user's ranking;     -   reaching a specified number of points;     -   dropping below a specified number of points;     -   change in the number and/or percentage of helpful votes for the         user's first reviews;     -   a user review score falls to a certain level (e.g., 0 points);     -   a determination that an item purchased by the user does not have         any reviews on the item web page;     -   availability of bonus points for submitting a first product         review for a specified product or class of products (e.g.,         underwear).

Review requests can also be transmitted to users using techniques and processes described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,963,848, the content of which is incorporated herein by reference.

Points can be assigned to a user based solely on the number of first product reviews submitted by the user (optionally within a specified period of time, such as the previous 3 months, or within other specified period, such as the beginning of the second quarter to the previous day), or points can be based on additional or different considerations. For example, a user can be assigned a first number of points (e.g., 40 points) for submitting the first review for a product (“first product review”), an additional number of points (or fraction of a point) for each helpful vote received from other users regarding the helpfulness/usefulness of the review, and a negative number of points (or fraction of a point) for each not helpful or not useful vote received. The votes may be provided via an item Web page that displays the user's review and voting buttons (e.g., helpful/unhelpful, good/bad, etc.).

By way of further illustration, a “helpful” vote may have a value of “1,” and a “not helpful” vote may have a value of “−1.” For example, a reviewer with 100 “helpful” votes and 20 “not helpful” votes may have a tally or score of 80. In another embodiment, the tally may be based on only “helpful” or on only “not helpful” votes, or equivalents thereof. The “helpful” and “not helpful” votes may optionally be assigned different values. For example, a “helpful” vote may be assigned a value of “2” and a “not helpful” vote may be assigned a value of “−0.5,” so that “helpful” votes are weighted more heavily than “not helpful” votes.

Optionally, the tally of votes/ratings given to anonymous reviews may be calculated differently from those given to non-anonymous reviews. In an example embodiment, a rating of a reviewer's anonymous review is given less weight then that of a rating of a non-anonymous review by the reviewer. For example, a “helpful” vote for a non-anonymous review by a given reviewer may be assigned a value of “2,” while a “helpful” vote for an anonymous review by the given reviewer may be assigned a value of “1.” Generally, this allows non-anonymous reviews and their authors to more easily attain higher scores or ratings than anonymous reviews, thereby encouraging reviewers to provide non-anonymous reviews, which generally appear more credible to readers.

Similarly, the tally of votes/ratings given to reviews by users that have been verified to have purchased the item being reviewed (e.g., by accessing a purchase history database record associated with the user or via a receipt provided by the user) may be calculated differently (e.g., have different weightings) from those given to users whose purchase or use of the item being reviewed has not been verified. Further example systems and methods for calculating a rating for a review that may be utilized are described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/715,929, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference.

Optionally, if a user's review receives a certain number of negative reviews or the user's review score falls to a certain level (e.g., 0 points) as a result of negative reviews, the user is so notified (e.g., via a Web page, email, SMS/mobile phone message, or other communication). The notification may include a link to the user's review via which the user may edit the review to improve its quality. Optionally, guidelines may be provided on how the review can be improved (e.g., provide additional substantive details, use shorter sentences, compare to other similar products, do not be insulting, etc.). The guidelines may be generic, or may be selected based on an automated or manual analysis of the review text.

Optionally, bonus points (e.g., extra points, such as a specific number of points, or a point multiplier, such a doubling the points for a review submission and/or for each helpful votes) can be added or included in the user's scores for first product reviews for specified products and/or product classes. Such bonus points can be used to further encourage users to provide reviews for certain products or product classes that do not have any reviews or that are generally under-reviewed.

For example, if few reviews are submitted for undershirts, users can be notified (e.g., via email, SMS or other mobile phone communication, Web page, or otherwise) that bonus points will be awarded to a user that submits a first product review for an undershirt product generally or for a specific undershot product (e.g., having a specific SKU). The communication can optionally include a link to a corresponding product page, wherein a control is provided via which the user can submit a review (e.g., a first product review).

In an example embodiment, bonus points are automatically or manually awarded for product reviews submitted that meet the some are all of the following criteria:

-   -   the product has been offered via the system for at least a first         specified period of time (e.g., 15 days, 30 days, 90 days, or         other specified period) and no review has been posted;     -   the product is in a product category wherein less than a         specified amount and/or specified percentage of products have         received a first review (e.g., less the 70%, 50%, 25%, or other         percentage);     -   the product detail page has been viewed a specified number of         times (e.g., 1 time, 5 times, or other specified number of         times), and no review has yet been posted;     -   the product is being offered by a relatively new seller that         became a seller on the web site hosted by the system within a         specified period of time (e.g., the last 30 days, 60 days, or         other specified number of times);     -   the product price;     -   the profit that would be realized from a sale of the product.

Optionally, a minimum and/or maximum point restriction may be set and stored in memory for first product reviews generally and/or for specific first product reviews. Thus, for example, a maximum of 100 points may be set and/or a minimum of 0 points may be set. The foregoing point limitations ensure that a single first product review (e.g., on a book that is very likely to be highly popular) with a large number of helpful votes does not unduly weight the user's ranking. Similarly, if a user submits a negative review for a controversial book, it is likely that the user may receive many biased unhelpful votes. Providing a minimum point score ensures that a single unpopular review will not unduly lower the user's ranking.

Optionally, however, if a user violates certain review rules (e.g., by submitting large number of duplicate supposed reviews that are not substantive, such as “good product”; by submitting reviews within a very short period of time (e.g., 30 seconds) after an item is posted, indicating that the user is trolling for first review opportunities; by submitting offensive reviews, etc.) the review may be removed and the user may be given the standard minimum per review that is in violation of the review rules, less than the standard minimum per review (e.g., −20 points), or the user may be prohibited from submitting additional reviews generally or first reviews specifically. Optionally, a review may be removed, associated points cancelled, and/or negative points awarded if the community votes or requests that review be removed.

Further, if it is determined that a user is participating in a voting circle (e.g., where a group of people automatically submit helpful votes for each other's review rather than on the basis of the quality of the reviews) the user can be similarly penalized as discussed above and/or the user's helpful votes are removed and not counted towards the corresponding review score. Similarly, if a user (e.g., a parent) always submits helpful votes for another user (e.g., a child), optionally the user's helpful votes are removed and not counted towards the corresponding review score. Other types of biased voting (e.g., voting by a reviewer enemy or friend) or non-credible voting (e.g., voting on review after review in very quick succession, wherein it is unlikely that the vote has had time to actually read the reviews) can be detecting and discounted as desired. Thus, different types of biased votes can be processed differently and the penalties for biased votes are optionally increased as the votes appear to be more fraudulent.

Optionally, a search service is provided via which a user can search for products that have not yet been reviewed. Optionally, the search may be limited by the user to specific product areas (e.g., books, text books, music, movies, magazines, newspapers, kitchen, home, outdoors, clothing, shows, jewelry, watches, accessories, toys, electronics, computers, office products, software, cameras, audio, video, cell phone, cell phone service, musical instruments, video games, food, pet supplies, beauty, healthcare, furniture, home improvement, exercise, automotive, industrial, scientific, lawn & garden equipment, tools, hardware, etc.) and/or to products that the system has a record of the user purchasing or licensing.

FIGS. 2-9 illustrate example user interfaces. As will be recognized, the particular features of the illustrated user interfaces are merely illustrative, and many other possible embodiments may be used as well. For example, elements from different user interfaces can be combined into the same user interface, elements from a given user interface can be divided up among multiple user interfaces, and users interfaces can include additional or fewer elements than those illustrated. Further, the language provided in the user interfaces is merely illustrative and optional, and other language and terminology may be used. The user interfaces are optionally provided as Web pages.

FIG. 2 (including FIGS. 2A1-A2) illustrates a user interface, which can act as a first review game landing page, providing information regarding users that have provided first product reviews. Links or menus are provided via which the user can access other user interfaces described herein.

Referring to FIG. 2, interface 202 provides a listing of monthly top first reviewers for a number of months (three in the illustrated example). One or more controls (e.g., a links) 204 are provided, which when activated, cause the user interface to display a listing of additional or all top first reviewers for a given month (or other specified time period).

A helpful first reviews interface 206 displays one or more first product reviews that have received the highest or among the highest helpful scores (e.g., wherein a helpful score equals or corresponds to the number of helpful votes from others minus the number of unhelpful votes). The first product reviews are displayed in association with a product title, a star review (where the greater the number of stars, the more favorable the user is rating the product), a review title, a review date, the name (actual or pseudo name) of the first reviewer, the number of points earned by the review, the number of helpful votes, the number of unhelpful votes, the difference between the number of helpful and unhelpful votes, and the number of first product review points assigned to the reviewer. The textual review is also provided. Optionally, a photograph or avatar/icon representing the reviewer and/or the product is presented. A control 208 is provided, which when activated, causes the user interface to display a listing of additional or all top first reviews.

A badge interface 210 is provided which lists the available badges (e.g., gold, silver, bronze, top first reviewer (lifetime)), and the number of users that have earned the badges.

Interface 212 lists, via a leaderboard, the users that have the most first review points earned is a specified period of time (e.g., within the last 30, 60, or 90 days). In this example, the top 10 users are listed, although fewer, additional, or all users that have provided first product reviews within the specified time period (or other time period) can be listed. In this example, a given entry includes the user's rank, a symbolic indication (e.g., an upwards or downwards pointing arrow or triangle) indicating whether the user's rank has improved or gotten worse as compared to a previous ranking, a photograph or icon corresponding to the user, the user name (real or pseudo name), the current number of first review points, the number of first reviews submitted within the specified period of time, and the percentage of helpful votes relative to the sum of (helpful—not helpful votes) received for the user's first product reviews within the specified period of time. A control is provided that when activated causes an expanded version of the leaderboard to be presented, as illustrated in FIG. 3 (including FIGS. 3A1-A2).

Interface 214 provides information regarding how to play the game, how points and badges are awarded, how certain titles are awarded, and a notification regarding the possibility of rule changes.

A forum interface 216 is provided via which a user can access, read and submit posts in forums related to the game/contest. For example, users can discuss matters that they are happy or unhappy with, provide information, ask advice, give advice, discuss accomplishments (negative or positive), or chat. The forum may include sub-forums dedicated to certain topics.

Interface 218 displays the user's name, current number of points received within a specified period of time (e.g., the current month), the user's current ranking, and an explanation regarding how many points are needed to receive certain corresponding badges, and regarding the badge currently awarded to the user (e.g., the gold badge in this example as indicated by the visual emphasis). Thus, the user can visit this Web page to check on their progress in terms of points, ranking and/or title. A control is provided which the user can activate to log-in to another account.

Interface 220 displays information regarding potential first review candidates and the number of points that would be earned by submitting a first review, wherein the candidates are products that the system has determined from the user account database that the user has purchased. The candidates may be presented via a scrollable list (including a product name and/or photograph), and when the user sees a product that the user is interested in review, the user can activate a “write a first review” link. A user interface (not shown), including a text entry field is displayed via which the user can enter a textual review, and a star selection user interface is optionally provided via which the user can assign an appropriate number of stars corresponding with the item quality.

Several other different interfaces are provided via which a user can identify and select a product to provide a first review for. The user interfaces may be used to select a specific product, browse a product category, or search for a product that has not yet been reviewed. Interface 222 displays several first review candidates of particular products or categories of products via which the user can browse and select a product to provide a first review for. The categories can be selected to be or to include those categories in which the user has made a product purchase.

Interface 224 includes search fields via which the user can search for products that are in need of a first review. A drop down menu may be used to select one or more product categories within which the search is to be conducted. A search text field is provided via which the user can enter one or more search terms, optionally using Boolean equations. The user can activate a search control or provide an enter command and, in response, the system will conduct a search in accordance with the user's selection and search terms and return corresponding search results for display to the user.

Interface 226 displays a scrollable list of first review candidates for which bonus points may be earned. The candidates optionally may be limited to or include products purchased by the user via the system. Optionally, products purchased as gift by the user for another (e.g., as indicated by a corresponding database record that indicates that the user has indicated (explicitly and/or by instructing that the product be gift wrapped) are excluded from the first review candidates provided via interface 226.

FIG. 3 illustrates an expanded view of the leaderboard 212 illustrated in FIG. 2, including an extended list 302 of first reviewers, including the following information for a given customer: rank, the rank in a previous period, name, the number of first reviews submitted in a period of time (e.g., the last 90 days), the number of review points (e.g., the points received for submitting reviews), the number of helpful votes, the number of unhelpful votes, the helpfulness percentage (e.g., 100 (helpful votes/(helpful+unhelpful votes)), and the number of current points (e.g., the score based the user's review points, the number of helpful votes, and the number of unhelpful votes). An extended display 304 of monthly top reviewers is also provided in this example. A selection menu 306 is provided via which the user can specify the time period from which to display monthly top reviewers (e.g., the last week, the last month, the last 6 months, the last 12 months, of all time, etc.). The types of information provided via the user interface illustrated in FIG. 3 are substantially the same as that provided in the leaderboard 212 and the monthly top reviewers interface 202 illustrated in FIG. 2, although in other embodiments, less, more, or additional information may be provided.

FIG. 4 (including FIGS. 4A1-A3) illustrates an expanded view of the most helpful first reviews interface 206 illustrated in FIG. 2, including an extended list of helpful first reviews. An extended display of monthly top reviewers is also provided. The types of information provided in this view are substantially the same as that provided in the leaderboard 212 and monthly top reviewers interface 202 illustrated in FIG. 2, although in other embodiments, less, more, or additional information may be provide.

FIG. 5 (including FIGS. 5A1-A3) provides an expanded view of the user interface 228 illustrated in FIG. 2. The illustrated user interface includes interfaces 518, 520, 522, 524, 526 corresponding to interfaces 218, 220, 222, 224, 226 illustrated in FIG. 2. In addition, user interface 502 provides a listing of first reviews submitted by the user. A listing entry in this example includes a product name and/or photograph, the number of points initially assigned for submitting the first review (e.g., 10 points, or if a bonus has been awarded, 20 points), the number of helpful votes received for the first review, the number of unhelpful points received for the first review, and the total score for the first review (e.g., Total points=first review points+number of helpful votes—number of unhelpful votes). The totals for each review (optionally including the displayed and undisplayed totals for a given time period or without a time limitation) are summed and displayed. Optionally, the first review points list 502 can be expanded to display the review points entries for all the user's reviews (optionally limited to a time period, such as the previous 3 months or the time period that the user's current ranking is based upon).

A “leaderboard position” user interface 504 is displayed which shows the user's ranking and the users whose rankings are within a specified range above and below the user (e.g., based on users that earned review points in a specified period of time such as the last 90 days). In this example, the user interface 504 shows the two users (having rankings of 21 and 22) ranked immediately above the user accessing the interface (having a rank of 23) and the two users ranked immediately below the user (having rankings of 24 and 25). A review user entry in this example includes the user name, user ranking, a photographic or icon representing the user, the number of recent points (e.g., earned in the last 90 days or other time period), and the number of lifetime reviews. A control is provided that when activated causes an expanded list of active first reviewers to be displayed.

A rank history user interface 506 includes a graphical display (e.g., an area, bar, and/or line graph) of the user's rank over a period of time (e.g., the time period on which the current rank is based, over the last 90 days, over the lifetime of the user's rankings, etc.), and provides a numerical rank for a certain number of recent months and the points earned during those months. A control is provided that when activated causes an expanded list of the rank history to be displayed (e.g., showing each month over the lifetime of the user's rank history).

A recent progress user interface 508 provides information on the user's recent progress relative to others and in absolute terms. For example, the recent progress user interface 508 may report some or all of the following (or other types of information):

-   -   a change in the user's ranking;     -   when the user's ranking has changed by a certain amount (e.g.,         an increase or decrease of at least 5 rankings);     -   when the user's ranking has reached a specified ranking level;     -   when the user has reached or surpassed a certain number of         points;     -   when the user has dropped below a specified number of points;     -   when the user has dropped a certain number of points;     -   when the user has submitted certain number(s) of first reviews;     -   a change in the user's title/badge;     -   when the user has been surpassed in ranking by another specified         user or users;     -   when the user has received a certain number and/or percentage of         helpful votes for the user's first reviews;     -   when a review score for a user review falls to a certain level         (e.g., 0 points);     -   a determination that an item purchased by the user does not have         any reviews on the item web page;     -   that a product purchased by the user is eligible for first         review bonus points.

Referring to interface 508, in this example the user is notified of certain other users the user passed in ranking and the associated time of the passing in ranking. The interface 508 also identifies a first review submitted by the user that is being provided with special treatment. In this example, the user is notified that the identified user's review is being highlighted to other users (e.g., via the most helpful review user interface 206, referred to as a “Spotlight First Review”)). In addition, the user is notified that the user was awarded a certain level of badge (e.g., a silver badge), and in congratulated on having submitted a notable number of first reviews (e.g., 100 reviews).

FIG. 6 (including FIGS. 6A1-A2) illustrates an expanded view 602 of interface 506, including an expanded graphical representation of the of user's rank over a period of time and including numerical representations of the user's performance on a monthly (or other time period) basis. The numerical information can include the user's rank during a specified time period (e.g., the rank achieved at the end of the time period), the number of first reviews submitted in the period of time (e.g., that month), the number of review points, the number of helpful votes, the number of unhelpful votes, the helpfulness percentage. FIG. 6 further includes interfaces 604, 606, 608, and 610 similar to interfaces 220, 222, 224 and 226 illustrated in FIG. 2.

FIG. 7 (including FIGS. 7A1-A2) illustrates an expanded view 702 of interface 502, and further includes interfaces 704, 706, 708, and 710 similar to interfaces 220, 222, 224 and 226 illustrated in FIG. 2.

FIG. 8 (including FIGS. 8A1-A3) illustrates an expanded view 802 of first review candidates interface 220 (listing a plurality of first review candidates with associated points for submitting a first review), as well as interfaces 804, 806 similar to interfaces 222 and 226. FIG. 9 (including FIGS. 9A1-A3) illustrates an expanded view 902 of the first reviews discussions/forums interface 228, wherein an entry listing includes a subject line, a number of posts, and when the last post was posted. Interfaces 904, 906 corresponding to interfaces 202, 206 are also provided.

FIG. 1 illustrates an example web site system that implements services described herein, and illustrates the flow of information between components of the system. As illustrated in FIG. 1, web servers 90 retrieve catalog content for particular products from a catalog service 94, which includes or accesses a data store, such as repository 96, of item content. The item content may, for example, include photos, reviews, price and availability data, and other types of descriptive information about particular products that are available to purchase, rent, download, review, post for sale, etc. via the web site.

The web servers 90 further communicate with a first review game system 110. The first review game system 110 further communicates with the item content database 96 and a user data database 108. The first review game system 110 provides services related to the first review game described above. For example, the first review game system 110 accesses the item content database 96 to identify items and categories of items lacking in reviews (e.g., those categories that have more than an average number of items without first reviews, or that have above a certain percentage of items (e.g., more the 50%, 60%, 70%, 80% or 90%), including items that do not have first reviews. In addition, the first review game system 110 determines when bonus points are to be offered for a first review.

The first review game system 110 accesses the user database 108 to identify users playing the first review game, determine which products they have purchased and to recommend first review candidates using such information. Optionally, the search engine 101 discussed below can be used to determine which products users have purchased and recommend first review candidates using such information and/or other information available to the search engine service 101 to determine potential affinities.

The first review game system 110 further accesses the number of first points a user has overall, on a monthly (and/or other time period) basis, and how many points the user has received for a given first review. Based on the user points and a specified ranking period (e.g., the previous 90 days), the service 110 determines rankings, assigns badges, identifies most helpful reviews, and provides other related services described herein.

The web servers 90 also optionally communicate with a tagging service 98 that maintains a database 100 of user-specific tag data. The tag data stored for each user may, for example, include a set of tag-item ID pairs, optionally together with various other types of data such as permission data and a creation timestamp. The tagging service 98 may receive both read requests from the web servers (e.g., when a user requests a page that displays personal tag data), and update requests (e.g., when a user tags an item). In an example embodiment, each tag is stored in association with the corresponding user, meaning that if two or more users create identical tags, these tags are treated as separate and distinct from each other.

The web servers 90 also communicate with the search engine 101 that allows users to search for information stored in the item content, such as products that do not have any associated user/customer reviews, and tag data repositories 96 and 100. As mentioned above, the search engine 101 may include functionality (including a keyword index) for users to search for items using their own respective tag associations, and/or the tag associations of others. A user interface for the search engine 101 is described above with reference to FIG. 2.

The web servers 90 also access a recommendations service 102 which generates item recommendations as described above. To request recommendations for a particular user, the web servers 90 send a list of one or more items (e.g., product IDs) to the recommendations service 102 (optionally together with associated item ratings), which responds with a list (e.g., of recommended items and/or first review candidates).

In the illustrated embodiment, the recommendations service 102 accesses a Similar Items Table 104 which contains item-to-item mappings used to generate the recommendations. The item-to-item mappings represented in this table 104 may reflect purchase-based similarities (e.g., items A and B are similar because a relatively large portion of the users who purchased item A also bought item B), item viewing based similarities (e.g., items A and B are related because a significant portion of those who viewed item A also viewed item B), tag-based similarities (e.g., items A and B are similar because a relatively large portion of the users who tagged item A assigned the same tag to item B), content-based similarities, review-based similarities, and/or similarities based on other criteria.

As similarly discussed above, the recommendations service 102 can utilize reviews submitted by a user in order to generate product recommendations. For example, if a user provided a review on an item, other similar products or products purchased or viewed by other users that purchased or viewed the reviewed product may be recommended to the user. Products that the user provided first reviews on may optionally be weighted more heavily in determining an affinity and providing recommendations then products where the user provided a review but did not provide the first review. Further, the content of the review provided by the user (e.g., the point rating and/or a text rating parsed by the system) may be used in determining what products to recommend.

Optionally, if the user has in the past indicated a willingness to provide first reviews (e.g., as determined by examining the number of first reviews submitted by the user within a certain time period and/or over the lifetime of the user's account), the service may increase the prominence of un-reviewed products that the service determines the user may otherwise have an affinity for in the recommendations provided to the user. The prominence can be provided by listing un-reviewed products first, by using a color emphasis/highlighting, by providing a text or symbol indicating that the product have not yet been reviewed, or otherwise.

The Similar Items Table 104 is generated or updated offline by the Item-Association Mining Application 106, which may use the same or similar data analysis methods to those described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,912,505, referenced above. In one embodiment, a similar items list generated by the Item-Association Mining Application 106 and stored in the Similar Items Table 104 consists of the N (e.g., 20) items which, based on correlations between items, are deemed to be the most closely related to the item for which associations are sought. An item in the Similar Items Table 104 is stored together with a commonality index (“CI”) value which indicates the relatedness of that item to the item for which associations are sought. Other recommendation engines or services capable of generating a set of recommended items given an input set of items may be used as well.

The web servers 90 also access one or more additional repositories of user data, logically represented in FIG. 1 by the repository 108. Because a group of individuals can share an account, a given “user” may include multiple individuals (e.g., two family members that share a computer). As illustrated by FIG. 1, the data stored for each user may include one or more of the following types of information (among other things) that can be used to generate recommendations: (a) the user's purchase history, including dates of purchase, (b) a history of items recently viewed by the user, (c) the user's item review/ratings profile, if any, (d) the user's first reviews, first review scores, helpful/not helpful review votes, ranking and badges/titles, and (e) the current contents of the user's personal shopping cart. Various other types of user information, such as wish list/registry contents, email addresses, shipping addresses, and clickstream histories, may additionally be stored.

The various components of the web site system 86 may run, for example, on one or more servers (not shown). In one embodiment, the Similar Items Table 104 is be stored as a B-tree data structure to permit efficient look-up, and may be replicated across multiple machines to accommodate heavy loads. As will be appreciated, the systems and processes may also be implemented using a recommendations algorithm that does not make use of a similar items table or other item-to-item similarity mappings.

Referring to FIG. 10, an example first review incentive process that can be executed via the system illustrated in FIG. 1 will now be described. Other embodiments can perform the process with fewer or additional states, or the states may be performed in a different order.

The process may be invoked in real-time in response to an online action of the user or may be continuously running. For example, the user may specifically access a first review landing page, such as that illustrated in FIG. 2, which causes the process to update the information to be displayed on the landing page. In addition or instead, the process may be invoked in response to an online action of the user that does not directly relate to playing the first review game. For example, the process may be invoked in response to a user having purchased an item that does not have a review and inferring or estimating that the user has had time to use the item.

Any of a variety of other methods can be used to initiate the first review incentive process and to display or otherwise convey the information discussed above with respect to the example user interfaces. For example, the information can automatically be generated periodically and sent to the user by e-mail, in which case the e-mail listing may contain hyperlinks to the user interfaces or to products needing reviews. Further, the information can be generated in advance of any request or action by the user, and cached until requested.

At state 1002, a user action is detected initiating the process. The user's account is accessed (e.g., from user data database 108), and the user's current first review points, current ranking, current title/badge, and the number of the user's helpful/not helpful first review votes are read. At state 1003, the current scores and rankings of other users are accessed (e.g., from user data database 108). At state 1004, the current ranking of the user is calculated based on the user's first review score (e.g., which is calculated based on the number of first reviews within a specified time period, the number of helpful/unhelpful first review votes, the number of bonus points, and/or other criteria) and that of other users.

At state 1006, the system determines whether the user's ranking, and/or title/badge entitlement has changed and whether any new or recent notable first review-related events have occurred with respect to the user.

At state 1008, the item content repository 96 is accessed and products without reviews are identified. At state 1010, items that have previously been purchased by the user that do not have reviews and that an inference or indication that the user has used the item are identified. At state 1012, the process updates and displays first review game-related information to the user using the web servers 90. For example, the information can include some or all of the information discussed above with respect to the various user interfaces (e.g., the user's current ranking, the user's ranking trend, the user's current badge assignment, the user's position relative to user's having somewhat higher and lower rankings, the current most or more helpful reviews, first review candidates, etc.).

Optionally, the user can request additional information (e.g., by activating an appropriate control or menu selection), access an item page in order to provide a first item review, or take other action.

As discussed above, in addition to first reviews, the embodiments and electronic interactive games/contests described herein may be utilized with respect to encouraging other types of user behavior, such as encouraging the submission of reviews generally (and not just first reviews), the submission of tags, the submission of votes as to the quality or helpfulness/unhelpfulness of reviews, the submission of pictures of products, the submission of product catalogs, product manuals, the submission of recommendations as to similar alternate products, the submission of lists of related items the user finds interesting or recommends (e.g., a list of children books, a list of novels, a list of toys, a list of cooking equipment, etc.), the submission of updates to product information, the submission of recommendations of accessories, the submission of useful software programs or widgets, the submission of information or corrections to a wiki/collaborative website, participating in a forum, etc. Users can be rewarded for behaving in the desired manner with points, bonus points, rankings, titles, and/or badges as similarly discussed above.

In certain instances, users may be incentivized to provide information where a complete lack of such information has been identified (e.g., via a search engine or otherwise) with respect to the relevant data record/data store (e.g., in the item content data repository 96, the tag data repository 100, the user data repository 108, or other data repository). In certain instances, the system may incentivize users to provide information where a complete lack of such information has been identified with respect to the relevant data record/data store and/or where there is such information in the data store, but the amount, quantity, or quality of such information is insufficient or less than a desirable amount (e.g., as measure relative to a corresponding threshold setting stored in system memory, wherein, for example, the threshold can be a single submission of a given type information, three submissions, five submissions, or other specified number of submissions) or quality (e.g., as determined by the numbers and/or rations of helpful/unhelpful votes, accurate/inaccurate votes, etc.).

For example, with respect to a product manual, in certain situations a single submission of a manual for a given item may be sufficient. Thus, in an example embodiment, points are awarded for the first person to submit the manual and not for subsequent submissions. Optionally, bonus points can be awarded for providing product manuals for certain types of products (e.g., as similarly discussed above with respect to first reviews). Optionally, users may be able to vote on the legibility or illegibility of a submitted manual, and such votes can be used to modify the score. For example, a user can be assigned a first number of points (e.g., 40 points) for submitting the first manual for a product, an additional number of points (or fraction of a point) for each “legible and complete” vote received from other users regarding the legibility and completeness of the manual, and a negative number of points (or fraction of a point) for each “illegible or incomplete” vote received. The votes may be provided via an item Web page that displays the manual and voting buttons (e.g., legible, illegible, complete, incomplete, etc.). Rankings, titles, badges, and/or information can be provided as similarly described above with respect to first reviews. Optionally, a search engine may be used to locate items without product manuals. Optionally, a recommendation engine is provided that identifies a user's potential affinity for an item lacking a product manual and suggests that the user provide a product manual for the identified item. Optionally, the system identifies users that have purchased an item lacking a product manual and asks some or all of those users (via email, an SMS/MMS message, a Web page, or otherwise) to provide a product catalog (e.g., via an upload of a digital version of the manual, as an email attachment, via fax, mail, or otherwise).

By way of further example, with respect to an item tag, in certain situations a certain minimum number of tags may desirable. Thus, in an example embodiment, points are awarded for the first person to submit a tag for an item and for subsequent tag submissions for the item. Optionally, a user may be awarded a first number of points for the being the first user to submit a tag for an item, and subsequent users submitting tags for the item are awarded a second number of points (e.g., equal to the first number of points, or less than the first number of points). Optionally, bonus points can be awarded for providing tags for certain types of products (e.g., as similarly discussed above with respect to first reviews), and not for others. Optionally, users may be able to vote on the helpfulness or accuracy of a submitted tag, and such votes can be used to modify the score for a tag submission. For example, a user can be assigned a first number of points (e.g., 40 points) for submitting an item tag, an additional number of points (or fraction of a point) for each helpful or accurate vote received from other users regarding the helpfulness or accuracy of the tag, and a negative number of points (or fraction of a point) for each unhelpful or inaccurate vote received. The votes may be provided via an item Web page that displays the tags and voting buttons (e.g., helpful, unhelpful, accurate, inaccurate, etc.). Rankings, titles, badges, and/or information can be provided as similarly described above with respect to first reviews. Optionally, a search engine may be used to locate items that have less then a specified threshold of tags (e.g., wherein, for example, the threshold can be a single tag, two tags, five tags, or other specified number of tags). Optionally, a recommendation engine is provided that identifies a user's potential affinity for an item lacking sufficient tags and suggests that the user provide a tag for the identified item. Optionally, the system identifies users that have purchased an item lacking sufficient tags and asks some or all of those users (via email, an SMS/MMS message, a Web page, or otherwise) to provide a tag.

By way of still further example, with respect to recommendations as to similar alternate products, in certain situations a certain minimum number of such recommendations may desirable. Thus, in an example embodiment, points are awarded for the first person to submit a recommendation as to similar alternate products for an item, and for subsequent alternate product recommendations for the item. Optionally, a user may be awarded a first number of points for the being the first user to submit an alternate product recommendation for an item, and subsequent users submitting alternate product recommendations for the item are awarded a second number of points (e.g., equal to the first number of points, or less than the first number of points). Optionally, bonus points can be awarded for providing alternate product recommendations for certain types of products (e.g., as similarly discussed above with respect to first reviews). Optionally, users may be able to vote on the helpfulness of a submitted alternate product recommendation, and such votes can be used to modify the score for a alternate product recommendation submission. For example, a user can be assigned a first number of points (e.g., 40 points) for submitting an alternate product recommendation, an additional number of points (or fraction of a point) for each helpful vote received from other users regarding the helpfulness of the alternate product recommendation, and a negative number of points (or fraction of a point) for each unhelpful vote received. The votes may be provided via an item Web page that displays the alternate product recommendation and voting buttons (e.g., helpful, unhelpful, etc.). Rankings, titles, badges, and/or information can be provided as similarly described above with respect to first reviews. Optionally, a search engine may be used to locate items that have less then a specified threshold of alternate item recommendations. Optionally, a recommendation engine is provided that identifies a user's potential affinity for an item lacking sufficient alternate product recommendations and suggests that the user provide an alternate product recommendation for the identified item. Optionally, the system identifies users that have purchased an item lacking alternate product recommendations and asks some or all of those users (via email, an SMS/MMS message, a Web page, or otherwise) to provide an alternate product recommendation.

By way of yet further example, with respect to lists of related products, in certain situations a certain minimum number of lists for a given product area may desirable. Thus, in an example embodiment, points are awarded each list containing at least a specified number (e.g., 1, 2, 3, or other specified number) of items (e.g., related items). Optionally, bonus points can be awarded for providing product lists for certain types of products (e.g., as similarly discussed above with respect to first reviews). Optionally, users may be able to vote on the helpfulness/usefulness of a submitted list, and such votes can be used to modify the score for a alternate product recommendation submission. For example, a user can be assigned a first number of points for submitting a related product lists, an additional number of points (or fraction of a point) for each helpful vote received from other users regarding the helpfulness of the alternate product recommendation, and a negative number of points (or fraction of a point) for each unhelpful vote received. The votes may be provided via an item Web page that displays the alternate product recommendation and voting buttons (e.g., helpful, unhelpful, etc.). Optionally, the number of points awarded for a list submission can related to the number of items in the list (e.g., 10 points for each additional item after a minimum initial number of items). Rankings, titles, badges, and/or information can be provided as similarly described above with respect to first reviews. Optionally, a search engine may be used to locate product areas that have less then a specified threshold of item lists and/or having less than a certain percentage of items on a list. Optionally, a recommendation engine is provided that identifies a user's potential affinity for a product area lacking sufficient item lists and suggests that the user provide an item list for the identified product area. Optionally, the system identifies users that have purchased an item from a product area lacking sufficient items lists (e.g., relative to a specified threshold) and asks some or all of those users (via email, an SMS/MMS message, a Web page, or otherwise) to provide item lists.

The item lists, alternate product recommendations, tags, reviews, catalogs, pictures, manuals, recommend accessories, guides, articles, other feedback, and/or other submissions are optionally displayed on, accessed from (e.g., via a hyperlink), or submitted via one or more corresponding relevant item detail pages. For example, the user interface illustrated in FIG. 12 (including FIGS. 12A1-6) provides links or fields for submitting pictures 1202, updates for product information 1204, feedback on images 1206, tag submissions 1208, user reviews/ratings 1210, 1212, discussion content (e.g., questions, opinions, information, etc.) for an online discussion forum, submission of item-related or other articles 1216, submission of item lists 1218, guides 1220 (for using an item, selecting an item, providing recommendations on a grouping of items, proving information on a grouping of related items, performing a process, etc.), or providing other feedback 1222.

Referring to FIG. 11, an example process for incentivizing users to submit information or to take a desired action via an interactive game that can be executed via the system illustrated in FIG. 1 will now be described. Other embodiments can perform the process with fewer or additional states, or the states may be performed in a different order.

As similarly discussed above with respect to FIG. 10, the process may be invoked in real-time in response to an online action of the user or may be continuously running. For example, the user may specifically access one or more game user interfaces. In addition or instead, the process may be invoked in response to an online action of the user that does not directly relate to accessing a game user interface. For example, the process may be invoked in response to a user having purchased an item whose catalog listing is missing or has an insufficient amount of certain types of information (e.g., a manual, sufficient numbers of tags, photographs, alternate item suggestions, helpful/unhelpful review votes, etc.).

Any of a variety of other methods can be used to initiate the illustrated process and to display or otherwise convey the information discussed above with respect to the example user interfaces. For example, the information can automatically be generated periodically and sent to the user by e-mail, in which case the e-mail listing may contain hyperlinks to the user interfaces or to products needing the identified information. Further, the information can be generated in advance of any request or action by the user, and cached until requested.

Referring again to FIG. 11, at state 1102, a user action is detected by the system, initiating the process. The user's account is accessed (e.g., from user data database 108), and the user's current game points, current ranking, current title/badge, and other information related to the user's score (e.g., the number of the user's helpful/not helpful votes for reviews, tags, photographs, accuracy votes, legibility votes, etc.; the number of legible/illegible votes for manuals, etc.) are read. At state 1103, the current scores and rankings of other users are accessed (e.g., from user data database 108). At state 1104, the current ranking of the user is calculated based on the user's current game score (e.g., which is calculated based on the number of the user's submissions within a specified time period, the number of votes from other users related to the submission, the number of bonus points, and/or other criteria) and that of other users.

At state 1106, the system determines whether the user's ranking, and/or title/badge entitlement has changed and whether any new or recent notable game-related events have occurred with respect to the user.

At state 1108, the item content repository 96 is accessed and products lacking the desired information are identified. At state 1110, items that have previously been purchased by the user lacking the desired information are identified. At state 1112, the process updates and displays game-related information to the user using the web servers 90. For example, the information can include some or all of the information discussed above with respect to the various user interfaces (e.g., the user's current ranking, the user's ranking trend, the user's current badge assignment, the user's position relative to user's having somewhat higher and lower rankings, candidates that need information submissions, etc.). The system optionally searches for and identifies candidates that need certain types of submissions (e.g., Reviews, tags, identification of similar or alternate products, item lists, pictures, product catalogs, product manuals, guides, articles, online discussion participation, updated product information, and/or accessory recommendations, etc.).

Thus, as described herein, certain example embodiments search for and identify items in an interactive electronic catalogue that do not have an associated item review or other types of desired information. Such items are identified selectively to users and such users are prompted or otherwise encouraged to submit a first review or other desired information. Certain example embodiments utilize a game format, where players are assigned points for submitting first reviews or other desired information and optionally further assignment points if other users find the first review or other desired information helpful, accurate, and/or legible.

Although certain example embodiments are described herein, other embodiments that are apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art, including embodiments which do not provide all of the benefits and features set forth herein, may also be utilized. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A computing system configured to identify data repository deficits, comprising: a server system, comprising a computing device, that hosts an interactive catalog of items arranged using a hierarchical browse structure; a data repository that stores: an item-to-item mapping that indicates similarities of items based at least in part on: (a) user viewing histories, (b) user purchase histories, (c) user tagging histories, (d) user review histories, (e) content, (f) or any combination of (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e); a first type of information, comprising user feedback including text feedback and video feedback, submitted by users for items in the interactive catalog of items, an identification as to which user submitted a given feedback, and an identification of a corresponding item in the interactive catalog of items for which the given feedback was submitted; a system comprising a search engine configured to identify catalog items in the interactive catalog of items that do not have an amount of feedback that meets a first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one; a recommendation system configured to: use similar items data stored in the data repository as a B-tree data structure, replicated across multiple machines to accommodate heavy loads, to determine, for a user, user item affinity based at least in part on a similarity of at least one item, for which the user previously provided feedback, with at least one of the identified catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one, the similarity determined based at least in part on the item-to-item mapping, based at least in part on the determined user item affinity, recommend to the user candidate items, identified as not having the amount of feedback that meets the first threshold wherein the first threshold is eater than one for the user to provide feedback for; and the computing system configured to selectively provide over a network, at least partly in response to a recommendation from the recommendation system recommending candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one, for display on a user system: a user interface that provides functionality for the user to select an item from the recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one; and a user interface via which the user can provide feedback for an item selected by the user from the recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one wherein the system is configured to generate and provide for display on a device of a second user an item detail page for a first item in the interactive catalog of items, the item detail page comprising user-submitted feedback for the first item.
 2. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of information that meets the first threshold regarding at least one of: accessories for respective catalog items, substitute identification items for respective catalog items, manuals for respective catalog items, or item photographs for respective catalog items.
 3. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of user provided descriptive tags that meets the first threshold.
 4. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of indications of usefulness with respect to user submissions that meets the first threshold.
 5. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of indications of accuracy with respect to user submissions that meets the first threshold.
 6. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of online discussion content that meets the first threshold.
 7. The computing system as defined in claim 1, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of lists of related items that meets the first threshold.
 8. The computing system as defined in claim 1, further comprising a search engine system configured to provide functionality for users to conduct searches to locate items in the interactive catalog that do not have the amount of feedback that meets the first threshold.
 9. A computer-implemented method of obtaining information for data store information deficits, the method comprising: accessing by a computing system a data store storing: an item-to-item mapping that indicates similarities of items based at least in part on: (a) user viewing histories, (b) user purchase histories, (c) user tagging histories, (d) user review histories, (e) content, (f) or any combination of (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e); a first type of information, comprising user feedback including text feedback and video feedback, submitted by users for items in an interactive catalog of items arranged using a hierarchical browse structure, wherein the interactive catalog of items is hosted on a server system, and an identification as to which user submitted a given feedback, and an identification of a corresponding item in the interactive catalog of items for which the given feedback was submitted; identifying, by a search engine of the computing system, catalog items in the interactive catalog of items that do not have an amount of feedback that meets a first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one; determining using similar items data stored in a data repository as a B-tree data structure, replicated across multiple machines, by a recommendation system of the computing system, user item affinity with respect to a user based at least in part on a similarity of at least one item, for which the user previously provided feedback, with at least one of the identified catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, the similarity determined based at least in part on the item-to-item mapping; recommending by the recommendation system to the user one or more candidate items, identified as not having the amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, for the user to provide for based at least in part on the determined user item affinity; and providing, over a network, for display on a user system: a user interface that provides functionality for the user to select an item from the one or more recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold; and a user interface via which the user can provide feedback for an item selected by the user from the one or more recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold selected by the user.
 10. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of the first type of information further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of information that meets the first threshold regarding at least one of: accessories for respective catalog items, substitute identification items for respective catalog items, manuals for respective catalog items, or item photographs for respective catalog items.
 11. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of user provided descriptive tags that meets the first threshold.
 12. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of indications of usefulness with respect to user submissions that meets the first threshold.
 13. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of indications of accuracy with respect to user submissions that meets the first threshold.
 14. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of online discussion content that meets the first threshold.
 15. The method as defined in claim 9, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of lists of related items that meets the first threshold.
 16. The method as defined in claim 9, further comprising a search engine system configured to provide functionality for users to conduct searches to locate items in the interactive catalog that do not have the amount of feedback that meets the first threshold.
 17. Non-transitory computer readable memory storing instructions that when executed by a computer system are configured to cause the computer system to perform operations comprising: accessing a data store storing: an item-to-item mapping that indicates similarities of items based at least in part on: (a) user viewing histories, (b) user purchase histories, (c) user tagging histories, (d) user review histories, (e) content, (f) or any combination of (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e); a first type of information, comprising user feedback including text feedback and video feedback, submitted by users for items in an interactive catalog of items arranged using a hierarchical browse structure and hosted on a server system, and an identification as to which user submitted a given feedback, and an identification of a corresponding item in the interactive catalog of items for which the given feedback was submitted; identifying catalog items in the interactive catalog of items that do not have an amount of feedback that meets a first threshold, wherein the first threshold is greater than one; determining, using similar items data stored in a data repository as a B-tree data structure, replicated across multiple machines, user item affinity with respect to a user based at least in part on a similarity of at least one item, for which the user previously provided feedback, with at least one of the identified catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, the similarity determined based at least in part on the item-to-item mapping; recommending to the user one or more candidate items, identified as not having the amount of feedback that meets the first threshold, for the user to provide feedback for based at least in part on the determined user item affinity; and providing, over a network, for display on a user system: a user interface that provides functionality for the user to select an item from the one or more recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold; and a user interface via which the user can provide feedback for an item selected by the user from the recommended candidate items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback that meets the first threshold.
 18. The non-transitory computer readable memory as defined in claim 17, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of information that meets the first threshold regarding at least one of: accessories for respective catalog items, substitute identification items for respective catalog items, manuals for respective catalog items, user submitted tags describing respective catalog items, or item photographs for respective catalog items.
 19. The non-transitory computer readable memory as defined in claim 17, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of indications of usefulness with respect to user submissions that meets the first threshold.
 20. The non-transitory computer readable memory as defined in claim 17, wherein the identification of catalog items that do not have a sufficient amount of feedback further comprises identifying catalog items that do not have an amount of lists of related items that meets the first threshold. 